this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2025
-15 points (36.8% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

8082 readers
142 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.


6. Defend your opinion


This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Don’t get me wrong, it’s great seven million people hit the streets to show their concern that the USA is becoming fascist. But let’s be realistic: nobody in the GOP or in the presidential office gives a shit; they are just sitting it out, knowing full well: on Monday it’s back to work for the common Joe. We’ve seen similar big protests in London against brexit and in Germany against the far right: politicians don’t care, the effect was very limited. What do they care about? Mainly to get re-elected, so activate voters. Or actions that pull in the press: throwing rotten eggs at politicians, the Brits have had some success with that. Example France or Netherlands: a couple of trucks with horse manure emptied on the White House lawn or blocking the senate entrance with tractors. For the USA, the Boston tea party comes to mind; now thát was a No Kings protest.

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lembot_0004@discuss.online 20 points 2 days ago (1 children)

All revolutions start with protests. You can't just start hanging politicians without previous protests. Protests help in assessing how many people are actually ready to do anything. It is the first step you can't omit. The formula is simple: Protests -> Police deal with them with stupid cruelty -> revolution.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

the problem is that the US public will likely won't to anything besides public protests which are treated as block parties.

a single nationwide general strike will get rid of fascism.

but they can't because it's "illegal".

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

a single nationwide general strike will get rid of fascism.

You're right.

I wish we could get the majority of Americans to just shut their wallets for two weeks, maybe only buy local, but they never will.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

That's a boycott not a strike, I think Chicago mayor was talking about a general strike.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You should know, Albert.

Everyone loves a pedant.

they are not even close.

A boycott is not buying stuff, a few people boycotting wont change anything. and the only risk to the person doing it is that they might be slightly inconvenienced.

A strike is different, you just refuse to work, putting yourself at risk of unemployment. if it is only one person, that means getting fired and blacklisted. you need everyone for a strike. it is high risk, must be done with all your peers, and it really fucking hurts the people you need to listen to you.

[–] rimu@piefed.social 7 points 2 days ago

nobody in the GOP or in the presidential office gives a shit

The protests are not only aimed at them. They're an opportunity for us to see in person how many others there are like us, to feel our power and to get people who normally sit on the couch taking their first political actions.

It's a process of movement building.

[–] DomeGuy@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

If the GOP didn't give a shit, they would simply ignore the rallies. Not spend several weeks futilely trying to brand them as "hate America" rallies or posting diarrhea-bomber AI slop.

That’s a starting point at least. Liberty, Diversity of tactics

[–] unmagical@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What do they care about? Mainly to get re-elected, so activate voters.

50501 protests are filled with activated voters.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

you believe there are going to be fair elections?

I envy your optimism

[–] unmagical@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago

I don't, nor am I optimistic. But there probably will still be elections, and I do think it's worth engaging with them nonetheless.

I was mostly pointing out that the demographic that tends to participate in 50501's events is more inclined to be "voters" than "anti-electoralism" anarchists.

[–] Ryanmiller70@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago

Wild that just like on Reddit, actual unpopular opinions get downvoted.

I agree though.

[–] ohulancutash@feddit.uk 4 points 2 days ago

It gives encouragement to those in government and the law to fight back.

[–] Paragone@piefed.social 2 points 2 days ago

The fact that you've got sooo many downvotes proves that what you're saying is intolerable to many..

I think you're fundamentally right, that the left is assuming that the right obeys group-pressure the same way that the left does and that is a bogus assumption.

Social-assertion can't derail the complete-national-highjacking that's being carried out in the US.

But the left can't understand that: it's unthinkable.

As I've said before, elsewhere, effective pressure, would be using private-investigators to build evidence of authority-criminality, then hiring lawyers to prosecute ( because establishment NEVER allows accountability against itself: it'll NEVER prosecute its own crimes ) the crimes that cases can be built solidly for.

Not mass-social-assertion.

Getting convictions would be the kind of pressure that would have had a chance at changing the outcome of this.

Trump's rule will result in destroyed Americas by the early 2030's.

So long as NOBODY ever gets to be important like him, then that's his "high-score", it's "how he won".

There are 3 categories of game:

  • Postive-Sum game: win-win alliances
  • Zero-Sum game: competitive-narcissism
  • Negative-Sum game: competitive-nihilism.

All the people who're presuming that only the Zero-Sum game motivates everyone, are half of the problem: they're incompetent at understanding the motivations of other players in our world's game!

As "John Braddock" stated, in the book "A Spy's Guide to Strategy", IF someone's playing a negative-sum game, & destroying you AND them is the intent, AND you are presuming some other-category of motivation in them, THEN you're incompetent in understanding or dealing-with them.

You don't understand their strategy, therefore you are incompetent in understanding your-own strategy's actual options.

Trump's playing mixed zero-sum & negative-sum game: so long as nobody significant lives after him, then he won. The greater the destruction, the higher his score.

The left can't understand that, & therefore they keep playing by rules that are figments-of-their-own-imagination, and NOT actual.

Which, of course, obliterates more & more & more of the remaining-opportunity, until it's all gone, & mass-butchery's being enforced.

Status-quo doesn't protect us from what they're doing: it will fail, in a tipping-point, soon.

_ /\ _

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Normally, I agree. It's hard to look at the last 20 years and conclude that protesting accomplishes anything meaningful.

In this case they do serve a purpose, which is to create widespread irrefutable evidence that sending the military to occupy US cities not only illegal, but wholly unnecessary.

[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 2 points 2 days ago

I fear you are right.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No more than your nihilistic cynicism, fool.

[–] chosensilence@pawb.social 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

it isn’t cynicism it’s reality. we need to do more than protest. i hope we are all aware of that.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

What makes it cynical is when and how you are bringing up this point.

I can't remember the last time I met liberal protestors who showed up to a No Kings style rally with the vibe of "We did it! We can stop fighting now! Gosh that sure was easy to win wasn't it?". Pretty much everybody understands this is a long multi-layered battle at this point if they aren't MAGA. There are many ways to fight and NOTHING about yesterdays No Kings protest sold the idea that those other methods aren't necessary, you are the one projecting that aspect onto it.

Like... who are you even aiming this at?

[–] chosensilence@pawb.social 1 points 2 days ago

i made one comment. i’m not the original commenter. nothing i said implied i thought those things. i simply want as many people as we can to realize it.

we need to address the pessimism and not shut it down. it is valid. there is a tremendous amount of work to be done and some of it is very dirty. coordination is a barrier.